0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 03/02/2019 11:12:55Prof Pierre-Marie Robitaille -- re P Herouni's antenna & the Death of the Big Bang.The Big Bang theory is simply a fairy tale that paradoxically postulates the extremely small, dense, and hot state of the primordial universe manifesting in its first few seconds, is now being seen in its time dilation image of being extremely large, sparse, and cooled state. The primordial universe, can now be empirically observed in its primodial timeline at the edge of the vast observable universe, which is not at all an extremely small, dense, and hot little ball. These supra contradicting postulations are just being plain silly for reifying its mythology.It's amazing such a myth is still being faithfully accepted, advocated, and advanced by the so called elites, and echoed to the rank and file levels. It must be the extremely contagious power of the modern physics cult science that still manages to corrupt with its overwhelming obfuscations.
Prof Pierre-Marie Robitaille -- re P Herouni's antenna & the Death of the Big Bang.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.01589.pdfPage 55.
Did Planck measure 2.72 K (microwave) at L2 at 1,500,000 km?
I thort Planck had instrument noise problems (or signal problems). Did Planck solve thems problems?
Quote from: mad aetherist on 15/03/2019 23:21:04Did Planck measure 2.72 K (microwave) at L2 at 1,500,000 km? YesQuote from: mad aetherist on 15/03/2019 23:21:04I thort Planck had instrument noise problems (or signal problems). Did Planck solve thems problems?The problems were a figment of your imagination and did not require solving.
I will get back to u re the problems with Planck's 4 K reference calibration for their LFI. Dr R wrote a paper in 2010 saying that the 4 K reference suffered from conduction throo the steel fixing washers, making it more of a 00 K reference.
If u do a youtube search for Herouni there is lots of other footage.
Robitaille's video pointed out that the Penzias telescope was near the water, and claimed that since Herouni's telescope was not (1700m altitude), the latter must be correct.But the ALMA telescope is at 5000 m altitude, so it should be even more believable?- Plus it uses the latest in cryogenic receiver design- There are some noise figures published for this telescope, but it is nowhere near 1.6KSee: https://www.eso.org/public/australia/teles-instr/alma/receiver-bands/
The crucial thing re the Herouni antenna is that the detector dish is inverted, plus it is well down below the rim of the main dish. Hencely direct (diffracted) ocean radiation is minimized. And direct atmospheric water radiation is minimized. And direct indirect ocean radiation re-radiation is minimized. However being spherical the minimization would i guess not be as good as if it were parabolic.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 18/03/2019 10:51:19The crucial thing re the Herouni antenna is that the detector dish is inverted, plus it is well down below the rim of the main dish. Hencely direct (diffracted) ocean radiation is minimized. And direct atmospheric water radiation is minimized. And direct indirect ocean radiation re-radiation is minimized. However being spherical the minimization would i guess not be as good as if it were parabolic.If that wasn't bollocks then the dishes used for satellite TV would have to be designed that way.It's not hard to calculate the diffraction effects. To a good approximation, the main beam's "width" is a cone with the angle (in radias) at the point equal to the ratio of the dish diameter to the wavelength.They are using 12 metre (1200 cm) dishes. In the middle of the CMBR the radiation has a wavelength near 10 cmSo the angular resolution is of the order of 10/1200 Roughly half a degree, or an area about the same size as the Moon. We really can point that away from the Earth without any problems.
Quote from: evan_au on 18/03/2019 08:45:16Robitaille's video pointed out that the Penzias telescope was near the water, and claimed that since Herouni's telescope was not (1700m altitude), the latter must be correct.But the ALMA telescope is at 5000 m altitude, so it should be even more believable?- Plus it uses the latest in cryogenic receiver design- There are some noise figures published for this telescope, but it is nowhere near 1.6KSee: https://www.eso.org/public/australia/teles-instr/alma/receiver-bands/That page lists noise temperatures, but those are not measurements of temperature.Madeatherist has been studiously avoiding answering the killer question.How does the Earth's ocean affect a satellite which is 15,000,000,000 metres from Earth and pointing away from it?
There must be a good reason why Planck's 2.72 K at 1,500,000 km at L2 is so close to COBE's 2.73 K at 950 km.
Madeatherist has been studiously avoiding answering the killer question.How does the Earth's ocean affect a satellite which is 15,000,000,000 metres from Earth and pointing away from it?
Grote Reber the maker of the first radio telescope reckons that the big bang is rubbish.ENDLESS, BOUNDLESS, STABLE UNIVERSESource: http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/galaxy/G_Reber.html GROTE REBER Honorary Research Follow CSIRO, Hobart https://bazaarmodel.net/Onderwerpen/Endless-Boundless-Stable-Universe/
Grote Reber the maker of the first radio telescope reckons that the big bang is rubbish.
ENDLESS, BOUNDLESS, STABLE UNIVERSE
I thort that they said that commonplace TV noise is CMBR (ie actually signal from the water in the atmosphere & oceans etc).